Hi JB, Yes, ok. I will focus on the Service implementation. It makes effectively more sense than sharing the same config across different bundles... which may even lead to possible inconsistencies.
Thanks for your advice! :) Regards, Guillaume. -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 16:32 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Sharing configuration accross bundles.. Best Practice. Sorry: s/Huillaume/Guillaume On 07/04/2012 04:25 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Huillaume, > > A mix between 1 and 3 would be my preferred solution: > > - the configuration is stored and handled by ConfigAdmin > - a "config" bundle could load/manage the ConfigAdmin PID and expose the > config as a service (Dictionary) > > 2 (sharing the same config between different bundles) is not recommanded > especially for concurrent access purpose. > > Regards > JB > > On 07/04/2012 03:57 PM, PAC Kieffer Guillaume wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to know what is the best practice in case of sharing >> configurations between different bundles... >> >> Different possibilities... >> 1) Create a feature and add the common config elements to the feature >> config itself? >> 2) Share the same bundle config between the different bundles? - Same >> persistent-id (no feature declaration) >> 3) Use a service that provides a Properties object that may also be >> accessed by the 2 bundles ? >> >> What makes more sense for you? >> >> Thanks for your wise input, >> >> Regards, >> Guillaume. >> > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré [email protected] http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
